[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v124y2023ics0166497223000627.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How formal and informal intellectual property protection matters for firms' decision to engage in coopetition: The role of environmental dynamism and competition intensity

Author

Listed:
  • Telg, Nina
  • Lokshin, Boris
  • Letterie, Wilko
Abstract
Firms engage in coopetition by collaborating with their direct competitors. We examine how reliance on protection mechanisms to safeguard intellectual property (IP) affects a firm's decision to engage in coopetition. In addition, we study how industry dynamism and competitive intensity moderate this relationship. Using a generalized structural equation model (GSEM), we find that firms are more likely to collaborate with rivals when their IP is protected. Firms employing formal protection mechanisms are more likely to engage in coopetition if they operate in a dynamic industry and they are less prone to engage in coopetition when using informal protection mechanisms in dynamic and competitive industries. We conjecture that this latter finding signals that firms employing informal mechanisms in such environments are more likely to prevent knowledge spillovers to a competitor by avoiding them as partnership candidates.

Suggested Citation

  • Telg, Nina & Lokshin, Boris & Letterie, Wilko, 2023. "How formal and informal intellectual property protection matters for firms' decision to engage in coopetition: The role of environmental dynamism and competition intensity," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:124:y:2023:i:c:s0166497223000627
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102751
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497223000627
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102751?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexandra Zaby, 2010. "Losing the lead: the patenting decision in the light of the disclosure requirement," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 147-164.
    2. Professor Bronwyn Hall, 2013. "The importance (or not) of patents to UK firms," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 410, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    3. I. P. L. Png, 2017. "Secrecy and Patents: Theory and Evidence from the Uniform Trade Secrets Act," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 176-193, September.
    4. Joanna Cygler & Włodzimierz Sroka & Marina Solesvik & Katarzyna Dębkowska, 2018. "Benefits and Drawbacks of Coopetition: The Roles of Scope and Durability in Coopetitive Relationships," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    5. Danny Miller & Peter H. Friesen, 1983. "Strategy‐making and environment: The third link," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(3), pages 221-235, July.
    6. Crass, Dirk & Valero, Francisco Garcia & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2019. "Protecting Innovation Through Patents and Trade Secrets: Evidence for Firms with a Single Innovation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 117-156.
    7. Michele Boldrin & David K. Levine, 2013. "The Case against Patents," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 3-22, Winter.
    8. Zobel, Ann-Kristin & Lokshin, Boris & Hagedoorn, John, 2017. "Formal and informal appropriation mechanisms: The role of openness and innovativeness," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 44-54.
    9. Anne-Sophie Fernandez & Paul Chiambaretto & Mathieu Chauvet & Juliane Engsig, 2021. "Why do MNEs both make and coopete for innovation?," Post-Print hal-03514740, HAL.
    10. Klaus Kultti & Tuomas Takalo & Juuso Toikka, 2007. "Secrecy versus patenting," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(1), pages 22-42, March.
    11. Tomaso Duso & Lars-Hendrik Röller & Jo Seldeslachts, 2014. "Collusion Through Joint R&D: An Empirical Assessment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(2), pages 349-370, May.
    12. Bronwyn Hall & Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers & Vania Sena, 2014. "The Choice between Formal and Informal Intellectual Property: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(2), pages 375-423, June.
    13. Anne-Sophie Fernandez & Paul Chiambaretto, 2016. "Managing tensions related to information in coopetition," Post-Print hal-02011849, HAL.
    14. Barankay, Iwan & Contigiani, Andrea & Hsu, David, 2018. "Trade Secrets and Innovation: Evidence from the “Inevitable Disclosure†Doctrine," CEPR Discussion Papers 13077, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Oxley, Joanne E, 1997. "Appropriability Hazards and Governance in Strategic Alliances: A Transaction Cost Approach," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 387-409, October.
    16. Siah Hwee Ang, 2008. "Competitive intensity and collaboration: impact on firm growth across technological environments," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(10), pages 1057-1075, October.
    17. Bennet A. Zelner, 2009. "Using simulation to interpret results from logit, probit, and other nonlinear models," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(12), pages 1335-1348, December.
    18. Andrea Contigiani & David H. Hsu & Iwan Barankay, 2018. "Trade secrets and innovation: Evidence from the “inevitable disclosure” doctrine," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(11), pages 2921-2942, November.
    19. Mowery, David C. & Oxley, Joanne E. & Silverman, Brian S., 1998. "Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation: implications for the resource-based view of the firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 507-523, September.
    20. Carl Shapiro, 2001. "Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard Setting," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 1, pages 119-150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Le Roy, Frédéric & Robert, Frank & Hamouti, Rizlane, 2022. "Vertical vs horizontal coopetition and the market performance of product innovation: An empirical study of the video game industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    22. Lhuillery, Stéphane & Pfister, Etienne, 2009. "R&D cooperation and failures in innovation projects: Empirical evidence from French CIS data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 45-57, February.
    23. Paul Chiambaretto & Jonathan Maurice & Marc Willinger, 2020. "Value creation and value appropriation In innovative coopetition projects," Working Papers hal-02497321, HAL.
    24. Johanna Gast & Katherine Gundolf & Rainer Harms & Elvin Matos Collado, 2019. "Knowledge management and coopetition: How do cooperating competitors balance the needs to share and protect their knowledge?," Post-Print hal-02943192, HAL.
    25. Kafouros, Mario & Aliyev, Murod & Krammer, Sorin M.S., 2021. "Do firms profit from patent litigation? The contingent roles of diversification and intangible assets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    26. Douglas C. Lippoldt & Mark F. Schultz, 2014. "Uncovering Trade Secrets - An Empirical Assessment of Economic Implications of Protection for Undisclosed Data," OECD Trade Policy Papers 167, OECD Publishing.
    27. John Hagedoorn, 1993. "Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 371-385, July.
    28. Ai, Chunrong & Norton, Edward C., 2003. "Interaction terms in logit and probit models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 123-129, July.
    29. Rajshree Agarwal & Martin Ganco & Rosemarie H. Ziedonis, 2009. "Reputations for toughness in patent enforcement: implications for knowledge spillovers via inventor mobility," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(13), pages 1349-1374, December.
    30. Belderbos, Rene & Carree, Martin & Diederen, Bert & Lokshin, Boris & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2004. "Heterogeneity in R&D cooperation strategies," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(8-9), pages 1237-1263, November.
    31. von Graevenitz, Georg & Wagner, Stefan & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2011. "How to measure patent thickets--A novel approach," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 6-9, April.
    32. Popadiuk, Silvio & Choo, Chun Wei, 2006. "Innovation and knowledge creation: How are these concepts related?," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 302-312.
    33. Arundel, Anthony & Kabla, Isabelle, 1998. "What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 127-141, June.
    34. Jan Boone & Jan Ours & Henry Wiel, 2013. "When is the Price Cost Margin a Safe Way to Measure Changes in Competition?," De Economist, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 45-67, March.
    35. Fernandez, Anne-Sophie & Chiambaretto, Paul & Chauvet, Mathieu & Engsig, Juliane, 2021. "Why do MNEs both make and coopete for innovation?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    36. Paul Chiambaretto & Jonathan Maurice & Marc Willinger, 2020. "Value creation and value appropriation in innovative coopetition projects," Post-Print hal-02497321, HAL.
    37. Bronwyn H. Hall & Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers & Vania Sena, 2013. "The importance (or not) of patents to UK firms," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 603-629, July.
    38. Oxley, Joanne E., 1999. "Institutional environment and the mechanisms of governance: the impact of intellectual property protection on the structure of inter-firm alliances," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 283-309, March.
    39. Walsh, John P. & Lee, You-Na & Jung, Taehyun, 2016. "Win, lose or draw? The fate of patented inventions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1362-1373.
    40. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia & Yang, Jialei, 2022. "Distinguishing between appropriability and appropriation: A systematic review and a renewed conceptual framing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    41. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    42. Schmiele, Anja & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2007. "Internationalizing R&D Co-opetition: Dress for the Dance with the Devil," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-045, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    43. Gątkowski, Mateusz & Dietl, Marek & Skrok, Łukasz & Whalen, Ryan & Rockett, Katharine, 2020. "Semantically-based patent thicket identification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    44. Raza-Ullah, Tatbeeq & Kostis, Angelos, 2020. "Do trust and distrust in coopetition matter to performance?," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 367-376.
    45. James J. Anton & Dennis A. Yao, 2004. "Little Patents and Big Secrets: Managing Intellectual Property," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(1), pages 1-22, Spring.
    46. Miotti, Luis & Sachwald, Frederique, 2003. "Co-operative R&D: why and with whom?: An integrated framework of analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1481-1499, September.
    47. Wu, Jie, 2012. "Technological collaboration in product innovation: The role of market competition and sectoral technological intensity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 489-496.
    48. Keupp, Marcus Matthias & Friesike, Sascha & von Zedtwitz, Maximilian, 2012. "How do foreign firms patent in emerging economies with weak appropriability regimes? Archetypes and motives," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1422-1439.
    49. Audrey Rouyre & Anne-Sophie Fernandez, 2019. "Managing Knowledge Sharing-Protecting Tensions in Coupled Innovation Projects among Several Competitors," Post-Print hal-02517076, HAL.
    50. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon J., 2014. "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 867-878.
    51. Contigiani, Andrea & Hsu, David H. & Barankay, Iwan, 2018. "Trade secrets and innovation: Evidence from the "inevitable disclosure" doctrine," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2018-303, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    52. Klaus Kultti & Tuomas Takalo & Juuso Toikka, 2006. "Simultaneous Model of Innovation, Secrecy, and Patent Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 82-86, May.
    53. Paul Chiambaretto & Anne-Sophie Fernandez, 2016. "The evolution of coopetitive and collaborative alliances in an alliance portfolio: The Air France case," Post-Print hal-02010661, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rouyre, Audrey & Fernandez, Anne-Sophie & Bruyaka, Olga, 2024. "Big problems require large collective actions: Managing multilateral coopetition in strategic innovation networks," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Klein, Michael A., 2022. "The reward and contract theories of patents in a model of endogenous growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    2. Crass, Dirk & Garcia Valero, Francisco & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2016. "Protecting innovation through patents and trade secrets: Determinants and performance impacts for firms with a single innovation," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    3. Crass, Dirk & Valero, Francisco Garcia & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2019. "Protecting Innovation Through Patents and Trade Secrets: Evidence for Firms with a Single Innovation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 117-156.
    4. Hussingera, Katrin & Issahd, Wunnam, 2022. "Trade secret protection and R&D investment of family firms," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-039, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Hyo Kang & Wyatt Lee, 2022. "How innovating firms manage knowledge leakage: A natural experiment on the threat of worker departure," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(10), pages 1961-1982, October.
    6. Robin Cowan & Nicolas Jonard & Ruth Samson, 2024. "Strategies of search and patenting under different IPR regimes," Working Papers of BETA 2024-20, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    7. Bronwyn Hall & Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers & Vania Sena, 2014. "The Choice between Formal and Informal Intellectual Property: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(2), pages 375-423, June.
    8. Klein, Michael A., 2020. "Secrecy, the patent puzzle and endogenous growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    9. Wang, Runhua, 2021. "Information asymmetry and the inefficiency of informal ip strategies within employment relationships," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    10. Rouyre, Audrey & Fernandez, Anne-Sophie & Bruyaka, Olga, 2024. "Big problems require large collective actions: Managing multilateral coopetition in strategic innovation networks," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    11. Farazi, Mohammad Saleh & Chiambaretto, Paul & Fernandez, Anne-Sophie & Gopalakrishnan, Shanthi, 2024. "Unbundling the impact of current and future competition on cooperation in coopetition projects for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(6).
    12. Zobel, Ann-Kristin & Lokshin, Boris & Hagedoorn, John, 2017. "Formal and informal appropriation mechanisms: The role of openness and innovativeness," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 44-54.
    13. Dai, Yanke & Du, Ting & Gao, Huasheng & Gu, Yan & Wang, Yongqin, 2024. "Patent pledgeability, trade secrecy, and corporate patenting," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    14. Katrin Hussinger & Wunnam Basit Issah, 2022. "Trade Secret Protection and R&D Investment of Family Firms," DEM Discussion Paper Series 22-11, Department of Economics at the University of Luxembourg.
    15. Luigi Alberto Franzoni, 2020. "Trade secrets law," Working Papers wp1150, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    16. Bernhard Ganglmair & Imke Reimers, 2019. "Visibility of Technology and Cumulative Innovation: Evidence from Trade Secrets Laws," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2019_119v1, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    17. Stefan, Ioana & Bengtsson, Lars, 2017. "Unravelling appropriability mechanisms and openness depth effects on firm performance across stages in the innovation process," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 252-260.
    18. Barros, Henrique M., 2021. "Neither at the cutting edge nor in a patent-friendly environment: Appropriating the returns from innovation in a less developed economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    19. Langlois, Jonathan & BenMahmoud-Jouini, Sihem & Servajean-Hilst, Romaric, 2023. "Practicing secrecy in open innovation – The case of a military firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    20. Gabrovski, Miroslav, 2015. "The Patent System as a Tool for Eroding Market Power," MPRA Paper 81330, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 10 Sep 2017.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:124:y:2023:i:c:s0166497223000627. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01664972 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.